Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:05:48 -0700
From:      Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
To:        karels@karels.net
Cc:        Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>, Stephen.Clark@seclark.us, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@freebsd.org>, Sten Daniel Soersdal <netslists@gmail.com>
Subject:   Re: 6.2 mtu now limits size of incomming packet
Message-ID:  <46992C9C.8040308@errno.com>
In-Reply-To: <200707140327.l6E3RqWA007006@redrock.karels.net>
References:  <200707140327.l6E3RqWA007006@redrock.karels.net>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

Mike Karels wrote:
>> In -CURRENT my changes to the ethernet input path maintain the use of 
>> ETHER_MAX_FRAME() however the check is folded under #ifdef DIAGNOSTIC. I 
>> don't recall adding this conditional or touching it so it seems to be 
>> something which was already thereo radded by someone else.
> 
> It has been there at least since 6.0.  The issue is that ETHER_MAX_FRAME
> is computed using ifp->if_mtu, as opposed to something like ETHER_MAX_LEN.
> This is under #ifdef DIAGNOSTIC in -current, not in -stable.
> 
>> Could be pilot error; its use in -CURRENT seems to apply strictly to the 
>> use of large-receive offload (LRO).
> 
> LRO relaxes the requirement, otherwise LRO packets would never pass the
> check.

I can't recall if I brought the check in when I moved a lot of common 
logic out of 802.3 drivers' rx intr handler or if it pre-dated that.  I 
believe the code is shared with netbsd (which I cross-checked when I did 
that cleanup work).

I think removing it is fine.  As has been said mtu was never intended to 
  be applied to the rx path.

	Sam


help

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46992C9C.8040308>